A leading Department of Justice attorney who quit his job after over the Obama administration's refusal to prosecute Black Panthers who intimidated voters outside polls during the 2008 election claims the administration has ordered the DOJ not to pursue voting rights cases against black people.

In an interview today, J. Christian Adams, former DOJ attorney and now a contributor at Pajamas Media, told Fox News, "There is a pervasive hostility within the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department toward these sorts of cases."

Asked whether there is a specific Justice Department policy against pursuing cases where the defendant is black and the victim is white, Adams replied, "Particularly in voting, that will be the case for the next few years. No doubt about it. If you had all the attorneys who worked on this case here, I am quite sure that they would say the exact same thing."

When Fox News asked Adams who has issued that mandate, he said, "There are some things I'm not going to reveal. They know who they are. They said if somebody wants to review these kinds of cases, it's not going to be done out of the Civil Rights Division. If the U.S. attorney wants to do it, that's up to them, but it's not going to happen in the Civil Rights Division. &#8230; It's a political appointee."

He added, "This is one of the examples of Congress not being told the truth and the American people not being told the truth about this case. It's one of other examples in this case where the truth simply is becoming another victim in the process."
The Justice Department's complaint was under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 against four defendants: the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense and its leader, Malik Zulu Shabazz, and the two men who appeared at the Philadelphia polling place Nov. 4, 2008. The complaint accused them of attempting to engage in, and engaging in, both voter intimidation and intimidation of individuals aiding voters.

A federal judge ordered default judgments against the Panthers after party members refused to appear in court. The Washington Times reported the Justice Department was seeking sanctions when Loretta King, acting assistant attorney general who had been granted a political appointment by President Obama in January 2009 to temporarily fill the position, ordered a delay in the proceedings. According to the report, the ruling was issued after King met with Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli, the department's No. 3 political appointee, who approved the decision.

Even though DOJ lawyers had won the case, it was suddenly dropped.

"The case was dismissed on May 15, [2009]," Adams told Fox News. "All the charges were dropped against three of the defendants and the final order against one of the defendants was a timid restraint."

Only one of four defendants faced punishment: a temporary injunction against appearing at Philadelphia polls with a weapon. The department stopped at the injunction and didn't call for criminal penalties, monetary damages or other civil penalties.

"We were ordered to dismiss the case," Adams said. "I mean, we were told drop the charges against the New Black Panther Party."

I don't agree with your conclusion. It sounds like a page right out of Fox News. No surprises there they like to stir up the pot. IMO this statement by Eric Holder is true:

"Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we average Americans simply do not talk enough with each other about race," Holder said.

Of course you don't your a member of the left that protects and condones Black Racism. Facts are FACTS, voter intimidation was a problem in this country, so STRONG voter intimidation laws were set in place. He numbnutz broke those FEDERAL laws. They didn't even show up at court. Yet their charges were ordered to be dropped by Holder. What if White KKK guys were doing this at poll stations in black neighborhoods? You would be all over it, screaming racism. Then image if the WHITE attorney general let them off. You would be screaming racism.

I don't agree with your conclusion. It sounds like a page right out of Fox News. No surprises there they like to stir up the pot. IMO this statement by Eric Holder is true:

"Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we average Americans simply do not talk enough with each other about race," Holder said.

Of course you don't your a member of the left that protects and condones Black Racism. Facts are FACTS, voter intimidation was a problem in this country, so STRONG voter intimidation laws were set in place. He numbnutz broke those FEDERAL laws. They didn't even show up at court. Yet their charges were ordered to be dropped by Holder. What if White KKK guys were doing this at poll stations in black neighborhoods? You would be all over it, screaming racism. Then image if the WHITE attorney general let them off. You would be screaming racism.

I don't agree with your conclusion. It sounds like a page right out of Fox News. No surprises there they like to stir up the pot. IMO this statement by Eric Holder is true:

"Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we average Americans simply do not talk enough with each other about race," Holder said.

Of course you don't your a member of the left that protects and condones Black Racism. Facts are FACTS, voter intimidation was a problem in this country, so STRONG voter intimidation laws were set in place. He numbnutz broke those FEDERAL laws. They didn't even show up at court. Yet their charges were ordered to be dropped by Holder. What if White KKK guys were doing this at poll stations in black neighborhoods? You would be all over it, screaming racism. Then image if the WHITE attorney general let them off. You would be screaming racism.

I don't agree with your conclusion. It sounds like a page right out of Fox News. No surprises there they like to stir up the pot. IMO this statement by Eric Holder is true:

"Though race-related issues continue to occupy a significant portion of our political discussion and though there remain many unresolved racial issues in this nation, we average Americans simply do not talk enough with each other about race," Holder said.

I think it's perfectly fine to question the decision made by Holder. I don't think agree with calling Holder a racist.

Click to expand...

You are correct...

It is far more precise to call the Obama Administration racist:

a Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has defended himself against charges of anti-Americanism and racism by referring to his foundational philosophy, the "black liberation theology" of scholars such as James Cone, who regard Jesus Christ as a "black messiah" and blacks as "the chosen people" who will only accept a god who assists their aim of destroying the "white enemy." Obama pastor's theology: Destroy 'the white enemy'

b. The minister chosen by President Obama upon the occasion of his inauguration:
The Associated Press noticed liberal Rev. Joseph Lowery's prayer raised eyebrows when he prayed for that day in the hazy future when "white will embrace what is right." That divisive note drew this headline: "Lowery gives sole inaugural note of racial caution." The entire dispatch was brief "When yellow will be mellow, when the red man can get ahead, man; and when white. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-gr...-mockery-whites-not-right-note-racial-caution

c. On Page 293 of my edition of "Dreams for My Father," Obama recounts Wright's "The Audacity of Hope" sermon
Obama quotes this passage:
"It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere Thats the world! On which hope sits!" Ben Smith's Blog - Politico.com It's at the quotidian core of the Afrocentric philosophy that Obama says drew him to the church But the Senator should have spoken up publicly against the semi-paranoid "white greed" explanation a long time ago, no? The first Wright sermon Obama heard. ... - By Mickey Kaus - Slate Magazine

d. The Financial Times reports that Brazils President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva blames white people for the global economic crisis. Specifically, white people with blue eyes and according to FT, he said "it was wrong that black and indigenous people should pay for white peoples mistakes." According to the FT, da Silva told reporters: This crisis was caused by the irrational behaviour of white people with blue eyes, who before the crisis appeared to know everything and now demonstrate that they know nothing.Brazils President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva blames Whitey for the troubles - Monsters and Critics

I think it's perfectly fine to question the decision made by Holder. Calling Holder a racist is another story.

Click to expand...

He is not the racist in the kind your used to condemning, meaning the guys in white sheets hanging black people. However, protecting Black Supremacist who clearly broke the law in intimidating whites, even one of his aids stating Holder won't prosecute Blacks if the victims are white and heck even his valiently and arrogantly acts of going after legislation he never read are actions that make him a racist.

I think it's perfectly fine to question the decision made by Holder. Calling Holder a racist is another story.

Click to expand...

He is not the racist in the kind your used to condemning, meaning the guys in white sheets hanging black people. However, protecting Black Supremacist who clearly broke the law in intimidating whites, even one of his aids stating Holder won't prosecute Blacks if the victims are white and heck even his valiently and arrogantly acts of going after legislation he never read are actions that make him a racist.

Click to expand...

Holder made a call on a case and you don't agree with it. I'm not sure that means he's a racist.

I would like to know his reasons for deciding this way. I'm reserving judgment. I don't trust Fox News.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!